Originally posted by RJHinds
You say after 11.Re1 Black's white square bishop is a problem because the only safe square is d7, but ideally black would like to keep that free for his c5 knight. I think, in this case there is no need to keep the d7 square available for the retreat of the c5 knight if it is attacked by b4 because he has a better square at e6 to go to. And blacks next moves 11.h6 eliminates the threat to the f6 knight. This is not the traditional KID, but the fianchetto variation by White and Black looks like he has acheived equality already.
You say after 11.Re1 Black's white square bishop is a problem because the only safe square is d7, but ideally black would like to keep that free for his c5 knight. I think, in this case there is no need to keep the d7 square available for the retreat of the c5 knight if it is attacked by b4 because he has a better square at e6 to go to. And blacks next mov for the knight with no apparent compensation since the position is now open instead of closed.
Yes, black has a nice square for his knight on e6, however, after Nf3 he has to make a move. Black played ..c5, which in hindsight you have to say is a mistake as white grabbed control of the centre. I'd be interested to hear what alternative you would suggest to blacks ..c5?
Black's move 15...Rb8 is a wasted move giving the advantage and initiative back to White. 15...a5 is the correct move. So that if 16.b4 ax4 opens the a-file for the Black rook.
This sounds pretty sensible to me. What is your alternative move to ..Rb8? I think white prepared b4 well, putting his rook on b1 before the advance was perhaps an attempt to avoid a rook exchange on the a file. Black seemed to respond to this move by occupying the b file with his rook. I haven't looked at it, but is there a possibility for white to recapture on b4 with the rook instead of the a pawn?
Also, black might have seen whites Bg2 and tried to avoid future tactical complications by removing the rook from the h1-a8 diagonal.. GM's seem to do this sort of thing quite a lot.
Instead of 17...c5 Black should probably have tried 17...Ng5+ and 18...Bxc3 because after 17...c5 18.e5 blocks any attack by the bishop as you pointed out.
According to the analysis on Chessbase ..Ng5+ hxg5 ..Bxc3 Bd2 "Has the disadvantage that the pawn going from h3 to g4 is actually something White welcomes."
I tend to agree, but this is still a lot better than what he did play. However, where does black go once these moves have been made? He still has to find moves. His bishop is attacked and has to be moved, so there's a loss of tempo right off the bat...unless he exchanges, but that leaves his black squares weak which just adds to his problems.
As Black on move 24, I would have preferred trading Knights instead of giving up the bishop for the knight with no apparent compensation since the position is now open instead of closed.
It's a tricky one. Black would obviously lose a tempo after cxd5, which gives white a free hand. I think at this point exchanges are generally favouring white as that pawn just gets harder to deal with. Capturing with the knight allows a further exchange of blacks Bg7. Whether this is to whites or blacks advantage is unclear to me though. It's the sort of position that really needs an engine to analyse correctly, there are so many possible continuations...
This analysis aside, what do you think of the opening itself? I think this is a good line to play if you are light on theory. For average players i feel it's much easier to manage this opening than going for the main line KID. I'd happily play the main line as black though, a lot of the ideas (installing a knight on c5, advancing the f/g pawns) can be played almost with consideration of what white is doing. It almost plays itself...